Uribe v. Mortgageit, Inc. et al
James Uribe and Frances Uribe |
Mortgageit, Inc., Countrywide Financial Corporation, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc, Angelo Mozilo, David Sambol, Bank of America, NA, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc and Does |
3:2008cv01983 |
October 27, 2008 |
US District Court for the Southern District of California |
Consumer Credit Office |
San Diego |
Barry Ted Moskowitz |
Nita L. Stormes |
Both |
Federal Question |
18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 ORDER Granting 8 and 9 Motions to Dismiss; Denying as Moot Motion for More Definite Statement; Granting Leave to Amend: MortgageITs motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety is GRANTED without prejudice. The complaint is DISMISSED in its en tirety as to defendant MERS; Countrywide defendants motion to dismiss [doc. #9] is GRANTED as follows: Plaintiffs negligent infliction of emotional distress cause of action is dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiffs quiet title, fraud, RICO, TILA, RESPA and cancellation causes of action are dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file an amended complaint within 20 days of the filing of this Order. Failure to file an amended complaint within the time provided will result in the closure of this case without further notice to the parties. Signed by Judge M. James Lorenz on 1/26/2009. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service).(mjj) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.